Couldn’t Tulsi Gabbard have gone the “Arlen Specter” route, and cited Scottish Law — if not the precise Scottish Law that Specter found for the “not proven, therefor not guilty” canard — to come up with something other than “yah”, “nay”, or “present”?

Off of this vote hinges Hillary Clinton’s nightmare talk of her third party bid… even though the Green Party is out of the question. (Interestingly, the local library had in the meeting room a “Green Party Presidential Candidate” that you could meet. I didn’t pick up who it was.)

As a whole, the problem with the Impeachment comes down to its great political quandary — I wish there were somehow someway a manner opinions on the matter may deviate from the manner of opinions on — oh, for instance, what do you say about Abortion (and it’d be there and not, say, trade policy which ends up strangely malleable — see too at least a piece of military policy), and at this point would you prefer to watch Hamilton or Duck Dynasty?

This entry was posted
on Thursday, December 19th, 2019 at 6:13 pm and is filed under Uncategorized.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.